The writer expresses surprise and admiration for the recipient’s undertaking of a useful project, despite their own advanced age and inability to contribute directly. They comment on the complexity and scale of the genealogical work described, noting a discrepancy in the count of ancestors across generations. Additionally, the writer corrects a historical inaccuracy regarding the role of secretaries of state and muses on the differing genealogical traditions across cultures. They conclude with respectful regards and acknowledge the recipient’s dedication to both history and faith.

The writer expresses that presenting new works to the recipient, who is esteemed as a leading figure in literature, seems unnecessary as the recipient’s own letters surpass contemporary books in quality. However, given the current tumultuous state of European affairs, the writer feels it is appropriate to offer a modest critique of a prevailing system of thought. They humbly hope that the recipient might find some value in the critique and are deeply respectful.

The elderly and dying writer has been informed of an unsigned letter dated 4 June written by his addressee. Although the writer is too removed from worldly affairs to engage in national disputes, he expresses deep respect for his correspondent’s esteemed contributions, which have notably saved Vienna from Ottoman control and may one day help rid Europe of these invaders. The author reflects on the failure of Christian princes to prioritise the public good over their perceived personal interests, while praising those of his correspondent’s rank who have achieved notable victories.